TB1-19642

TB1-19642

Because the panel found significant inconsistencies and omissions between the POE notes, PIFs and oral testimony that undermined credibility, and because objective country evidence and subsequent state measures demonstrated available and operational state protection, the claimants failed to prove a well‑founded fear of persecution on a Convention ground or a section 97(1) risk; therefore their claims were rejected.

Citation
TB1-19642
Parties
Claimant: XXXX XXXX; Minor Claimant: XXXX XXXX XXXX
Court
Refugee Protection Division
Jurisdiction
Canada
Judgment Date
15 July 2019
Procedural Posture
Refugee Protection Claim Redetermination (rpd) / Hearing De Novo and Decision
Outcome
Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.
Legal Topics
Convention Refugee, State Protection, Credibility Assessment, Persecution, Roma Discrimination
Source Language
English
Immigration Law Refugee Law Administrative Law Convention Refugee State Protection Credibility Assessment Persecution Roma Discrimination

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

XXXX XXXX

Claimant

XXXX XXXX XXXX

Minor Claimant

Procedural Posture

Refugee Protection Claim Redetermination (rpd) / Hearing De Novo and Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the claimants' evidence is credible
  2. 2 Whether past discrimination and incidents amounted to persecution
  3. 3 Whether effective state protection was available and would be available on return

Ratio Decidendi

Because the panel found significant inconsistencies and omissions between the POE notes, PIFs and oral testimony that undermined credibility, and because objective country evidence and subsequent state measures demonstrated available and operational state protection, the claimants failed to prove a well‑founded fear of persecution on a Convention ground or a section 97(1) risk; therefore their claims were rejected.

Court Disposition

Claims rejected; claimants are not Convention refugees and not persons in need of protection.

Orders

  • Claims dismissed (not Convention refugees or in need of protection)
  • Decision issued July 15, 2019 by Panel Chair Fahimeh Mortazavi